Insect spraying: rethink needed

The campaign to eliminate mosquitoes through routine insect spraying is not working! And it's dangerous. We at Eco Hvar are asking for change.

INSECT SPRAYING ON HVAR

From Jelsa Council: "The insect spraying programme, as a means of protecting the population against infectious diseases is carried out in order to eliminate mosquito larvae, thus removing the possibility for mosquitoes to develop and multiply, in this way reducing damage to the environment and people" (e-mail, 11.08.2017.)*

WHY WE ARE WORRIED

Infectious diseases like Dengue and West Nile Fever are extremely rare in Croatia1,2,3,4. Despite this, insect spraying in the form of 'fogging' against adult mosquitoes is carried out on Hvar three times during the high summer tourist season, and there are separate actions against mosquito larvae and flies at various times throughout the year.

The insect control actions have been carried out for years without adhering fully to the regulations laid down by the County Public Health Institute: 

i) for the fogging, dangerous chemical pesticides are spread all over the environment;

ii) the very serious possible adverse effects of the pesticides have not been advertised; 

iii) little or no use has been made of environmentally-friendly alternatives to poisons;

iv) there is no public education about pest control;

v) warnings about the 'fogging' actions are totally inadequate;

vi) the routes taken by the 'fogging' vehicle are not made public;

vii) the fogging spraying has been done without regard to the vineyards, olive groves, orchards and vegetable plots alongside the roads, so that substances which are not authorized to be used on plants enter the food chain nonetheless (see 'Pesticides, Laws and Permits' for more details about authorizations);

viii) the larvicide and fly control measures are not publicized at all;

ix) at local level, it seems that the poison spraying programme is not under strict supervision and control, as it should be according to the regulations;

x) it seems that no-one at local or national level is monitoring the effectiveness and possible ill-effects relating to the spraying programme: despite regular insect suppression measures, every year there are increasing numbers of mosquitoes, as they become resistant to the poisons used 5,6,7; at the same time, there has been a visible significant decline in numbers of birds. bats, and beneficial insects. Monitoring of invasive mosquito species was started in Croatia in 2016, but since then it has been limited in scale, and there has been no monitoring of any kind on Hvar, to our knowledge.

2011: Warning to beekeepers, Croatian Beekepers' Association, but such warnings have been patchy over the years

DETAILS OF THE POISONS

POISONS USED: In 2012, two pyrethroid insecticides were used on Hvar for the 'fogging', a combination of Permethrin and Cypermethrin; in 2014, the spray used across the Jelsa Council area was Permex 22E (active ingredients Permethrin and Tetramethrin, in combination with a synergist, Piperonyl Butoxide); in 2015 Microfly (Cypermethrin),and Twenty-one (Azamethiphos) were used against flies; in 2017, fogging in the Hvar Town, Stari Grad and Jelsa rtegions was carried out using Permex 22E, while Cipex (Cypermethrin). Microfly (Cypermethrin) and Muhomor (Azamethiphos) were used against flies around the rubbish bins and rubbish dumps. Azamethiphos is an organophosphate, the others are pyrethroids. The combined effects of such chemical pesticides on environmental and human health are not known

Pyrethroids8 are dangerous poisons 9,10,11. Each of the poisons is dangerous in its own right, not only for insects but for other living creatures. In 2017, overnight 'fogging' took place in June, July and August. The street spraying is indiscriminate, spreading poison over houses, terraces, gardens, fields, and any hapless humans or animals who happen to get in the way. 

ABOUT THE INSECTICIDES USED IN THE JELSA COUNCIL AREA, 2017

Cipex - active ingredient Cypermethrin12 (pyrethroid). Cypermethrin is very toxic to cats13, bees, aquatic insects and fish, and to a lesser degree to birds. In humans, Cypermethrin poisoning can give rise to numbness, burning, loss of bladder control, vomiting, loss of co-ordination, coma, seizures, and (rarely) death 14,15,16. It is classified in the United States as a possible cause of cancer17.

Permex 22E- the two active pyrethroid ingredients of Permethrin and Tetramethrin. Permethrin 18,19comes in many different formulations, some more poisonous than others. It is highly toxic to bees, sea organisms, fish20 and other animals21. It is also poisonous to cats22. The possible ill-effects on humans are considered less dramatic than those of Cypermethrin, but it can cause neurological damage23,24, as well as problems in the immune and endocrine systems. It can have a particularly bad effect on children, and the American Environmental Protection Agency classified it as a potential carcinogen in 2006.25 Given their known ill-effects on aquatic life-forms, pyrethroids must not be used near water sources. Also Permethrin is not allowed on places where animals forage for food.

The EPA registration document for Tetramethrin (2010)26 classified it as a potential human carcinogen, and identified it as extremely toxic to bees and aquatic organisms, including fish and aquatic invertebrates. It can cause dizziness, breathing difficulties, coughing, eye irritation, gastrointestinal upset, blisters and skin rashes. The EPA document stated that: "Tetramethrin is used by individual home-owners or industrial / commercial property owners, in individual, isolated areas, and in small amounts as opposed to wide scale uses (i.e., for agriculture or mosquito abatement by public authorities)." 27 For this reason, they did not test the effect of Tetramethrin on drinking water. Tetramethrin is not supposed to be used on or near foodstuffs27.

The synergist Piperonyl Butoxide in Permex 22E carries harmful effects of its own, as it is highly toxic to aquatic life, with long-lasting effects (ECHA infocard)

Microfly - active ingredient Cypermethrin (see above, under Cipex).

Muhomor - active ingredient Azamethiphos28, an organophosphate poison which is not on the list of insecticides approved in the European Union.29,30. The instructions state that it should only be applied to target surfaces, and not sprayed in the air. Muhomor AZ was the product used for spraying around dustbins and rubbish dumps on Hvar in 2017. It is a water-soluble insecticide designed to eliminate flies in stalls for cattle, calves, horses, pigs, and chickens31. It is mostly used in enclosed spaces. As at September 2021, it was not on the list of products authorized by the European Chemicals Agency.

INSECTICIDES USED IN THE HVAR TOWN AREA, 2017

According to the published Programme of Measures for Compulsory Pest Control 2017, published by the Town Wardens' Office, five pyrethroids were listed for use in the summertime 'fogging' actions: Cypermethrin, Deltamethrin32, D-Phenothrin33, Permethrin and Resmethrin34 (p.9, table 2 in the Programme). Phenothrin is especially toxic to cats35, bees36 and aquatic organisms37. Resmethrin is particularly poisonous to fish, also to birds, and is potentially harmful for humans38. It has been banned from sale in the United States since 201539.

BEES: All the poisons named here are toxic to bees. As long ago as 1998, Permethrin, d-Phenothrin and Resmethrin were included in a list of insecticides known to be particularly harmful to bees, with effects lasting even some time after application40.

RE THE WARNINGS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. We are talking here about very dangerous substances, yet warnings are minimal: Jelsa Council places a letter from the firm which carries out the poison spraying on the Council's public notice boards. Stari Grad announces it on its website. There is no warning through the media, nothing via the Tourist Offices. Beekeepers are not given special warning, even though they stand to suffer loss. The warnings are not given in any language other than Croatian, even though the spraying takes place during the high season when Hvar is teeming with foreign tourists.

Local citizens and visitors have the right to be fully informed about the spraying programme. There should be public announcements, detailing the substances to be used and their possible adverse effects; the complete map of the route the 'fogger' will take; the method of administering the spray; and the precise timing of the action.

Local authorities which order the 'fogging' actions are duty-bound to inform local inhabitants and guests through all available channels, and in all relevant languages.

Public warning - but did anyone notice?

CONCLUSIONS

The insect suppression programme as carried out on Hvar over the past few years is potentially damaging for human health, also for animals, birds, non-target insects and the environment. The programme is not achieving its aims. The way in which it is being carried out is irresponsible. not transparent, and on many counts unacceptable.

WE RECOMMEND:

Given that the risks of infectious diseases from mosquitoes are small, while the risks of spraying poisons over public areas are much greater, the current programme of summer spraying should be stopped as a matter of urgency, and alternative methods of controlling unwanted insects should be explored, as allowed for in the Regulations governing compulsory insect control.

A tactic: poison companies use cartoon images to mask the serious risks from mass insecticide spraying

© Vivian Grisogono MA(Oxon) 2017, amended September 2021.

* Original: "program dezinsekcije kao mjere zaštite pučanstva od zaraznih bolesti provodi se kako bi se suzbila ličinka komaraca te uklonili uvjeti za razvoj i razmnožavanje, a time smanjila šteta za okoliš i zdravlje ljudi."

FOOTNOTE: For more details about the pesticides used on Hvar, their possible adverse effects, and up-to-date information on their EU approval status, see our articles 'Pesticides and their Adverse Effects' and 'Pesticide Products in Croatia'. For an explanation of the approvals processes in the EU and Croatia, see 'Pesticides, Laws and Permits'

POISON SPRAYING ON HVAR: REFERENCES

1. Gjenero-Margan, I., Aleraj, B., Krajcar, D., Lesnikar, V., Klobučar, A., Pem-Novosel, I., Kurečić-Filipović, S., Komparak, S., Martić, R., Đuričić, S., Betica-Radić, L., Okmadžić, J., Vilibić-Čavlek, T., Babić-Erceg, A., Turković, B., Avšić-Županc, T., Radić, I., Ljubić, M., Šarac, K., Benić, N., Mlinarić-Galinović, G. 2011. Autochthonous dengue fever in Croatia, August–September 2010. Eurosurveillance, 16 (9).

2. Pem-Novosel, I., Vilibic-Cavlek, T., Gjenero-Margan, I., Kaic, B., Babic-Erceg, A., Merdic, E., Medic, A., Ljubic, M., Pahor, D., Erceg, M. 2015. Dengue virus infection in Croatia: seroprevalence and entomological study. New Microbiologica, 38, 97-100.

3. Barbić L, Listeš E, Katić S, Stevanović V, Madić J, Starešina V, Labrović A, Di Gennaro A, Savini G. 2012. Spreading of West Nile virus infection in Croatia. Veterinary Microbiology. 159(3-4):504-8.

4. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. (Provides regular updates on the spread of communicable diseases in Europe)

5. Weill, M., Lutfalla, G., Mogensen, K., Chandre, F., Berthomieu, A., Berticat, C., Pasteur, N., Philips, A., Fort, P., Raymond, M. 2003. Comparative genomics: Insecticide resistance in mosquito vectors. Nature 423: 136-137 (8 May 2003)

6. Owusu, H. F. Jančáryová, D., Malone, D., Müller, P.. 2015. Comparability between insecticide resistance bioassays for mosquito vectors: time to review current methodology? Parasites and Vectors 8: 357

7. Aguirre-Obando, O. A., Pietrobon, A. J.. DallaBona, A. C., Navarro-Silva, M. A. 2015. Contrasting patterns of insecticide resistance and knockdown resistance (kdr) in Aedes aegypti populations from Jacarezinho (Brazil) after a Dengue Outbreak. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 60:1 94-100 (January–March 2016)

8. EPA Information Sheet. 2016. Pyrethrins and Pyrethroids. (information on the use of pyrethrins and pyrethroids as insecticides, the current reevaluation of this group of pesticides in registration review, and previous assessments, decisions, and risk mitigation efforts.)

9. Beyond Pesticides. 2001. chemicalWATCH factsheet: Synthetic Pyrethroids.

10. Walters, J.K., Boswell, L.E., Green, M.K., Heumann, M.A., Karam, L.E., Morrissey, B.F., Waltz, J.E. 2009. Pyrethrin and Pyrethroid Illnesses in the Pacific Northwest: A Five-Year Review. Public Health Reports 124 (1): 149-159

11. Ingram E.M., Augustin, J., Ellis, M.D., Siegfried, B.D. 2015. Evaluating sub-lethal effects of orchard-applied pyrethroids using video-tracking software to quantify honey bee behaviors. Chemosphere 135: 272-277

12. TOXNET Toxicology Data Network (U.S.National Library of Medicine). Cypermethrin.

13. PARASITIPEDIA.net. updated 2017. CYPERMETHRIN, safety summary for veterinary use.

14. Cornell University, (Extoxnet). 1993. Pesticide Information profile: Cypermethrin.

15. PubChem Open Chemistry Database. 2005. Cypermethrin.

16. Aggarwal, P., Jamshed, N., Ekka, M., Imran A. 2015. Suicidal poisoning with cypermethrin: A clinical dilemma in the emergency department. Journal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock. 8:2 123-125.

17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs. 2016. Chemicals Evaluated for Carcinogenic Potential. Annual Cancer Report.

18. World Health Organization. 2006. "International Program on Chemical Safety, Environmental Health Criteria 92: Permethrin."

19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. "TRI Explorer: Providing Access to EPA's Toxic Release Inventory Data."

20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. August 2009. Permethrin Facts.

21. Hoffmann, M., Meléndez, J.L., Ruhman, M.A., 2008. Risks of Permethrin Use to the Federally Threatened California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii) and Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis), and the Federally Endangered California Clapper Rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus), Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris), and San Francisco Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia). Environmental Fate and Effects Division Office of Pesticide Programs, Washington, D.C. 20460

22. International Cat Care. Permethrin Poisoning in Cats.

23. U.S. Centers for Disease Control (ATSDR). 2003. "Toxicological Profile for Pyrethrins and Pyrethroids."

24. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. "Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Permethrin."

25. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Permethrin & Resmethrin (Pyrethroids), Toxicity and Exposure Assessment for Children's Health. TEACH Chemical summary.

26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008, revised 2010. Reregistration Eligibility Decision Document for Tetramethrin.

27. Thoreby, E. (author), Williams, M.M. (editor), Lah, K. (updater) 2011. Tetramethrin. Toxipedia.

28. Scottish Environment Protection Agency. Azamethiphos. Scottish Pollutant Release Directory.

29. University of Hertfordshire. Azamethiphos. Veterinary Substances Database.

30. Pesticides Action Network (PAN) Europe. 2006. What substances are banned and authorized in the EU market?

31. Muhomor. 2017.  Muhomot je insekticid topiv u vodi. Djelatna tvar: Azametifos u koncentraciji 10%. Genera, Jedna komapnija za Jedno zdravlje.

32. PubChem, Open Chemistry Database. 2017. Deltamethrin.

33. PubChem, Open chemistry Database. 2017. D-Phenothrin.

34. US EPA Archive Document. 2007. Permethrin and Resmethrin (Pyrethroids). TEACH Chemical Summary.

35. Parasitipedia. 2017. Phenothrin: safety summary for veterinary use.

36. US EPA. 2008. Reregistration Eligibility Decision for d-Phenothrin.

37. WHO/FAO 1994. d-Phenothrin. WHO/FAO Data Sheet on Pesticides no.85.

38. PubChem Open Chemistry Database. 2017. Resmethrin.

39. US EPA. 2011. Permethrin, Resmethrin, d-Phenothrin (Sumithrin®): Synthetic Pyrethroids for Mosquito Control.

40. Alabama A&M and Auburn Universities. 1998. Protecting honey bees from pesticides.

You are here: Home about animals Poisons Beware Insect spraying: rethink needed

Eco Environment News feeds

  • Communities in the middle of new national forest to show how housebuilding can be delivered alongside nature

    A new set of forest towns will be built in the area between Oxford and Cambridge, nestled in the middle of a new national forest.

    After facing anger from nature groups over the deregulation in the upcoming planning bill, ministers are trying to demonstrate that mass housebuilding can be delivered in conjunction with new nature. The government has promised to plant millions of trees to boost England’s nature.

    Continue reading...

  • Lawyers call for clarity over law as six are found guilty while being stopped from using defence used by fellow activists

    Six environmental protesters were convicted after they were denied the ability to put a “reasonable excuse” defence or climate facts before the jury, despite these being afforded to other activists acquitted for taking part in the same demonstration.

    After an eight-day trial at Southwark crown court in London, the six Just Stop Oil (JSO) activists were found guilty of public nuisance, which carries a maximum 10-year sentence, for climbing gantries on the M25 in 2022 to demand an end to new fossil fuel projects. They will be sentenced next month.

    Continue reading...

  • Exclusive: Experts say impact on people of colour and those who do not drive is ‘grave environmental injustice’

    Air pollution in England and Wales has fallen, but the poorest neighbourhoods are still exposed to the most extreme levels of toxins, new analysis has found.

    Experts have called this a “grave environmental injustice” as the inequality around who is exposed to air pollution has dramatically grown in the last decade.

    Continue reading...

  • Indigenous leaders, environmental activists and forest defenders are determined to make this a summit like no other

    A day into a river voyage between Santarém and Belém, a dozen or so passengers on the Karolina do Norte move excitedly to the port side of the boat to see the cafe au lait-coloured waters of the Amazon river mix with the darker, clearer currents of the Xingu.

    “That confluence is like the people on this boat,” said Thais Santi. “All from different river basins, but coming together for this journey.”

    Continue reading...

  • Jamie Oliver, Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and major supermarkets want to double amount of beans Britons eat

    Jamie Oliver and Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall are among a group of celebrity chefs and supermarkets spearheading a new campaign to double UK bean consumption by 2028.

    There has been a long push for people to include more legumes in their diets – they are climate friendly and healthy. As the UK faces increasing disease related to poor diets as well as increasing food prices, and the campaigners argue that it is the correct time to launch a drive to “bang in some beans” to the nation’s meals.

    Continue reading...

  • Though intensive farming has ravaged its habitat, could sensitive planting at energy sites aid the species’ revival?

    November is when bumblebees disappear for the winter. One of the most common of the UK’s 24 species is the red-tailed bumblebee (Bombus lapidarius). These social insects live in burrows, breed in colonies and forage all summer.

    At this time of year, the workers and male bumblebees, having mated, die off and next year’s generation of queens burrow into holes in the bottom of hedges and old walls to hibernate until the warmth of spring.

    Continue reading...

  • Scientists are only beginning to grasp the scale of the issue and understand what impact the tree frogs may have on the islands’ rare wildlife

    On the way to her office at the Charles Darwin research station, biologist Miriam San José crouches down near a shallow pond shrouded by vegetation and reaches deep into the foliage, pulling out a small green plastic box recorder.

    She left it there overnight to capture the infamous croaks of a Fowler’s snouted treefrog (Scinax quinquefasciatus), known to Galápagos scientists as an invasive threat, with repercussions researchers are only beginning to grasp.

    Continue reading...

  • We are raiding the Guardian long read archives to bring you some classic pieces from years past, with new introductions from the authors.

    This week, from 2022: Kenya’s great lakes are flooding, in a devastating and long-ignored environmental disaster that is displacing hundreds of thousands of people

    By Carey Baraka. Read by Reice Weathers

    Continue reading...

  • In The White House Effect, now available on Netflix, archival footage is used to show how the US right moved from believing to disputing the climate crisis

    In 1988, the United States entered into its worst drought since the Dust Bowl. Crops withered in fields nationwide, part of an estimated $60bn in damage ($160bn in 2025). Dust storms swept the midwest and northern Great Plains. Cities instituted water restrictions. That summer, unrelentingly hot temperatures killed between 5,000 and 10,000 people, and Yellowstone national park suffered the worst wildfire in its history.

    Amid the disaster, George HW Bush, then Ronald Reagan’s vice-president, met with farmers in Michigan reeling from crop losses. Bush, the Republican candidate for president, consoled them: if elected, he would be the environmental president. He acknowledged the reality of intensifying heatwaves – the “greenhouse effect”, to use the scientific parlance of the day – with blunt clarity: the burning of fossil fuels contributed excess carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, leading to global warming. But though the scale of the problem could seem “impossible”, he assured the farmers that “those who think we’re powerless to do anything about this greenhouse effect are forgetting about the White House Effect” – the impact of sound environmental policy for the leading consumer of fossil fuels. Curbing emissions, he said, was “the common agenda of the future”.

    Continue reading...

  • The climate crisis is causing the permafrost to melt in Alaska, forcing the village of Nunapitchuk to relocate

    Children splash gleefully in the river as adults cast fishing lines or head into the Alaska tundra to hunt. It’s a scene that has characterized summer days for centuries among the Yup’ik people who have long lived in south-western Alaska, where the village of Nunapitchuk stands. But, with temperatures in Alaska warming nearly four times faster than most parts of the globe, that way of life is about to change.

    Homes in Nunapitchuk have been sinking into the permafrost, and residents have decided their only choice is to move the entire village to higher ground.

    Continue reading...

Eco Health News feeds

Eco Nature News feeds